Retrospective comparison of outcomes, diagnostic value, and complications of percutaneous prolonged drainage versus surgical pericardiotomy of pericardial effusion associated with malignancy

Pericardiocentesis versus window formation in malignant pericardial effusion: trends and outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Malignant pericardial effusion (MPE) in patients with cancer is associated with poor prognosis. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes in patients with cancer who underwent pericardiocentesis versus pericardial window formation.

METHODS

In the present study, 765 consecutive patients with cancer (mean age 58.4 years, 395 men) who underwent pericardial drainage between 2003 and 2022 were retrospectively analysed. All-cause death and MPE recurrence were compared based on the drainage method (pericardiocentesis vs pericardial window formation) and time period (period 1: 2003-2012; period 2: 2013-2022).

RESULTS

Pericardiocentesis was performed in 639 (83.5%) patients and pericardial window formation in 126 (16.5%). There was no difference in age, sex distribution, proportion of metastatic or relapsed cancer, and chemotherapy status between the pericardiocentesis and pericardial window formation groups. Difference was not found in all-cause death between the two groups (log-rank p=0.226) regardless of the period. The pericardial window formation group was associated with lower MPE recurrence than the pericardiocentesis group (6.3% vs 18.0%, log-rank p=0.001). This advantage of pericardial window formation was more significant in period 2 (18.1% vs 1.3%, log-rank p=0.005). In multivariate analysis, pericardial window formation was associated with lower MPE recurrence (HR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.63, p=0.001); younger age, metastatic or relapsed cancer, and positive malignant cells in pericardial fluid were associated with increased recurrence.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing pericardial drainage for MPE, pericardial window formation showed mortality outcomes comparable with pericardiocentesis and was associated with lower incidence of MPE recurrence.

Comparing Outcomes of CT-Guided Percutaneous Pericardial Drainage with Surgical Pericardial Window in Patients with Symptomatic Pericardial Effusions

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

To compare short-term outcomes of CT-guided percutaneous pericardial drainage (PPD) versus subxiphoid surgical pericardial window (PW) drainage and analyze the risk factors associated with their outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent either percutaneous drainage with drainage catheter placement or PW with surgical drain placement for symptomatic pericardial effusion between January 1, 2006 and August 31, 2016 was performed after institutional review board approval (decision number 16-783). The primary objective was to test for associations between the short-term (≤30 days post procedure) complication and recurrence rates in patients with symptomatic pericardial effusions. The secondary objectives were to test for associations between short-term complications with changes in vital signs.

RESULTS

Of the 257 procedures included in the final analysis, 142 were in the percutaneous drainage group. Short-term complication rate was significantly greater (p < 0.001) in patients undergoing PW, 17% (19/114), as compared with PPD, 2% (3/142). The estimated odds of having complications in the PW cohort was 9 times greater than the percutaneous drainage cohort (OR = 9.3, 95% CI:  2.7-32.3). No significant difference was observed between whether or not a patient experienced a short-term recurrence and any of the explanatory variables (patient demographics, imaging, and vital signs).

CONCLUSION

CT-guided PPD is a safer alternative to surgical PW as it leads to fewer complications without a significant difference in recurrence rate of pericardial effusion.

Radiation-Induced Pericardial Disease: Mechanisms, Diagnosis, and Treatment

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We aim to give a concise overview of the different clinical manifestations of both acute and long-term radiotherapy-related pericardial diseases, the underlying pathophysiology as well as the diagnosis and treatment options.

RECENT FINDINGS

Radiotherapy-related pericardial disease is common, but despite radiotherapy being a cornerstone of many cancer treatments, this disease entity is relatively underrepresented in clinical trials, resulting in a paucity of research data on pathophysiology and management. Since the development of innovative cancer treatments, survival has significantly improved. Therefore, the importance of long-term treatment-related side effects increases, most notably cancer treatment-related cardiovascular toxicity. In patients undergoing radiotherapy as a part of their cancer treatment, radiotherapy-related pericardial disease can manifest early (during or shortly after radiotherapy administration) or very late (several years to decades after treatment). This exceptionally long latency period confronts physicians with treatment-related side effects of radiotherapy regimens that may have been abandoned already.

Peritoneal Carcinoma Unveiling a Hidden Threat: A Case of Malignant Pericardial Effusion

Malignant pericardial effusion (MPE) is a slowly progressive and potentially clinically silent condition. Pericardial effusion can arise in oncology patients due to several factors, including disease spreading directly or metastatically, anticancer therapy side effects, or both. Solid and hematological malignancy metastasis more frequently involves the pericardium than primary tumors, with lung cancer being the most common metastatic tumor to involve the pericardium. While 5%-20% of all patients with metastatic neoplasms have pericardial involvement, MPE rarely appears with hemodynamic instability. Occasionally, MPE constitutes the initial manifestation of an underlying malignancy. Diagnosis and treatment require a multidisciplinary approach and a high degree of clinical suspicion. We present a case of a 59-year-old female with a history of peritoneal carcinoma who presented with persistent dyspnea on exertion following an episode of pneumonia that was treated with antibiotics. Physical examination and bedside point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) revealed fluid in the pericardial sac. The cytological examination of the fluid revealed it to be of malignant origin, resulting from metastasis from gynecologic adenocarcinoma. Pericardiocentesis was done, and symptoms improved after fluid drainage.

Effects of intrapericardial administration after catheter drainage on malignant pericardial effusion in non-small cell lung cancer: A real-world study

BACKGROUND

Malignant pericardial effusion (MPE) is a serious complication of cancer that can be potentially deadly. It usually occurs in advanced or terminal stages of the disease, and as a result, patients with MPE often have a poor prognosis. There is a limited amount of research available that directly compares the effectiveness and safety of intrapericardial drug administration following pericardial drainage versus catheter drainage alone in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who have MPE.

METHODS

We retrospectively included 86 patients with NSCLC with MPE at Zhejiang Cancer Hospital. Survival and recurrence estimates were determined with the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

We divided the 86 patients with NSCLC into two groups: a pericardial drainage group (34 out of 86, 39.5%) and an intrapericardial administration group (52 out of 86, 60.5%). The response rates were 70.6% and 76.9% (p = 0.510), respectively. The median OS was 132.0 and 234.0 days (p = 0.579), respectively. The median time to recurrent drainage was 43.0 and 104.0 days (p = 0.170), respectively. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 44.1% and 61.5% (p = 0.113), respectively. The most frequent AEs were pain (27.9%) and fever (24.4%). Additionally, two patients in the intrapericardial administration group died of cardiac arrest.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with catheter drainage alone, intrapericardial medication infusion during catheter drainage did not have significantly different effects. AEs require close monitoring and management.

Continuous drainage for the treatment of gastric cancer with pericardial metastasis and cardiac tamponade: A case report

Key Clinical Message

Signet-ring cell gastric carcinomas presenting as pericardial effusion early in diagnosis are rare and associated with high mortality and a poor prognosis. There are two interesting aspects of this case: primary gastric carcinoma presenting as cardiac tamponade and the metastatic behavior of gastric signet-ring cell carcinoma.

Abstract

This report describes an 83-year-old man diagnosed to have cardiac tamponade due to massive pericardial effusion. A cytological analysis of the pericardial effusion disclosed adenocarcinoma. The patient was treated with continuous pericardial drainage and the amount of pericardial effusion decreased.

Clinical outcomes of image-guided percutaneous drainage of pericardial effusion in cancer patients: A single-center retrospective analysis

AIM

Catheter removal, survival, and recurrence rates after percutaneous pericardial effusion drainage in cancer patients are not fully understood. We evaluated the clinical outcomes of image-guided percutaneous pericardial effusion drainage in cancer patients.

METHODS

From January 2014 to September 2017, 113 percutaneous drainages for symptomatic pericardial effusion were performed in 100 cancer patients (median 60 years; range, 7-84 years) using ultrasound or angio-computed tomography. An 8-Fr drainage catheter was placed using the Seldinger technique via the subxiphoid (n = 73), apical (n = 23), or left parasternal (n = 17) routes. Success rates, complications, and postprocedural clinical outcomes of drainages were retrospectively assessed.

RESULTS

The technical and clinical success rates were 100% and 99%, respectively, without major complications. The median duration of catheterization and evacuated pericardial effusion volume were 6 days (range, 1-72 days) and 970 ml (range, 140-7635 ml), respectively. Catheters were removed after the first drainage in 86 cases (86%). Symptomatic pericardial effusion recurred in nine patients after catheter removal, in whom redrainages were performed 13 times with a median duration to redrainage time of 48 days (range, 13-529 days). During the follow-up period (median 106 days [range, 1-1396 days]), 61 patients died. The median survival was 140 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 95-276 days), and the median catheter-free survival was 111 days (95% CI, 60-152 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Image-guided percutaneous pericardial effusion drainage for cancer patients is safe and helps alleviate symptoms. Additionally, catheter removal is possible in most patients, allowing a catheter-free period for patients.

Breast Cancer Complicated by Cardiac Tamponade in a Patient With Neurofibromatosis Type 1

Pericardial effusion may occur as a result of malignant pericarditis, which may in turn result in cardiac tamponade. This paper reports on a rare case of cardiac tamponade that occurred in an African American patient with breast cancer and neurofibromatosis. Herein, we present a case of a 38-year-old woman with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) and breast cancer. She presented with sudden shortness of breath and hypotension. Computed tomography of the chest and an echocardiogram confirmed the presence of cardiac tamponade. Symptomatic relief was obtained following an emergency pericardiocentesis. The patient experienced a recurrence of symptomatic pleuro-pericardial effusion, requiring repeat therapeutic pericardiocentesis and thoracocentesis. To eliminate accumulating fluid, an indwelling drain was placed. The clinical condition of the patient, however, continued to deteriorate and she expired a few days after admission. When patients with breast cancer present with dyspnea, clinicians should maintain a high index of suspicion of cardiac tamponade; urgent imaging should be performed to exclude tamponade. Further research is needed to identify the factors that predict cardiac tamponade in breast cancer patients as well as the optimal treatment for the condition. It is also necessary to examine the relationship between a history of neurofibromatosis and cardiac tamponade.

Malignant Cardiac Tamponade: A Complication of Untreated Breast Cancer

Carcinomatous pericarditis is a rare complication of locally aggressive breast cancer in which malignant cells directly extend into the pericardium causing inflammation and creating a pericardial effusion. A 40-year-old woman with untreated metastatic breast cancer presented to an outpatient clinic in significant distress with symptoms of progressive shortness of breath and bilateral leg swelling. An urgent echocardiogram demonstrated a large pericardial effusion with echocardiographic evidence of cardiac tamponade. She underwent emergent pericardiocentesis of the effusion that was deemed to be malignant after cytologic evaluation. Subsequently, she opted for palliative treatment involving the surgical creation of a right pericardial window and placement of an indwelling pleural catheter. Internists should maintain a high index of suspicion for malignant cardiac tamponade in at-risk patients, especially those with locally aggressive and advanced malignancies.

Predictors of Recurrence and Survival in Cancer Patients With Pericardial Effusion Requiring Pericardiocentesis

Aim

This study investigated the factors predicting survival and the recurrence of pericardial effusion (PE) requiring pericardiocentesis (PCC) in patients with cancer.

Materials and Methods

We analyzed the data of patients who underwent PCC for large PEs from 2010 to 2020 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. The time to the first recurrent PE requiring PCC was the interval from the index PCC with pericardial drain placement to first recurrent PE requiring drainage (either repeated PCC or a pericardial window). Univariate and multivariate Fine-Gray models accounting for the competing risk of death were used to identify predictors of recurrent PE requiring drainage. Cox regression models were used to identify predictors of death.

Results

The study cohort included 418 patients with index PCC and pericardial drain placement, of whom 65 (16%) had recurrent PEs requiring drainage. The cumulative incidences of recurrent PE requiring drainage at 12 and 60 months were 15.0% and 15.6%, respectively. Younger age, anti-inflammatory medication use, and solid tumors were associated with an increased risk of recurrence of PE requiring drainage, and that echocardiographic evidence of tamponade at presentation and receipt of immunotherapy were associated with a decreased risk of recurrence. Factors predicting poor survival included older age, malignant effusion on cytology, non-use of anti-inflammatory agents, non-lymphoma cancers and primary lung cancer.

Conclusion

Among cancer patients with large PEs requiring drainage, young patients with solid tumors were more likely to experience recurrence, while elderly patients and those with lung cancer, malignant PE cytology, and non-use of anti-inflammatory agents showed worse survival.

Pericardiocentesis or surgical drainage: A national comparison of clinical outcomes and resource use

Background

While institutional series have sought to define the optimal strategy for drainage of pericardial effusions, large-scale comparisons remain lacking. Using a nationally representative sample, the present study examined clinical and financial outcomes following pericardiocentesis (PC) and surgical drainage (SD) in patients admitted for pericardial effusion and tamponade.

Methods

Adults undergoing PC or SD within 2 days of admission for non-surgically related pericardial effusion or tamponade were identified in the 2016–2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Multivariable logistic and linear models were developed to evaluate the association between intervention type and outcomes. The primary outcome of interest was mortality while secondary endpoints included reintervention, periprocedural complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), hospitalization costs and 30-day non-elective readmission.

Results

Of an estimated 44,637 records meeting inclusion criteria, 28,862 (64.7%) underwent PC while the remainder underwent SD for initial management of pericardial effusion or tamponade. PC was associated with significantly increased odds of in-hospital mortality, reintervention and 30-day readmission relative to SD. PC was also associated with greater odds of cardiac complications but lower odds of infection, respiratory failure and blood transfusions compared to SD. Although PC was associated with shorter index hospital length of stay and costs, the two strategies yielded similar 30-day cumulative costs.

Conclusion

Management of pericardial effusion with PC is associated with greater odds of mortality, reintervention and 30-day readmission but similar 30-day cumulative costs compared to SD. In the setting of adequate hospital capability and operator expertise, SD is a reasonable initial treatment strategy for pericardial effusion.

Recurrence of pericardial effusion after different procedure modalities in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer

Background

Lung cancer with related pericardial effusion is not rare. Intervention is a crucial step for symptomatic effusion. It is unknown, however, whether the different invasive interventions for pericardial effusion result in different survival outcomes. This study analyzed the clinical characteristics and prognostic factors for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who have undergone different procedures.

Methods

From January 2006 to June 2018, we collected data from patients with NSCLC who have received invasive intervention for pericardial effusions. The patients were divided into three categories: simple pericardiocentesis, balloon pericardiotomy, and surgical pericardiectomy. Kaplan–Meier curve and log-rank test were used to analyze the pericardial effusion recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of 244 patients were enrolled. Adenocarcinoma (83.6%) was the major NSCLC subtype. Invasive intervention, including simple pericardiocentesis, balloon pericardiotomy, and surgical pericardiectomy, had been carried out on 52, 170, and 22 patients, respectively. The 1-year RFS rates in simple pericardiocentesis, balloon pericardiotomy, and surgical pericardiectomy were 19.2%, 31.2%, and 31.8%, respectively (P = 0.128), and the median RFS was 1.67, 5.03, and 8.32 months, respectively (P = 0.008). There was no significant difference in OS, however, with the median OS at 1.67, 6.43, and 8.32 months, respectively (P = 0.064). According to the multivariable analysis, the gravity in pericardial fluid analysis, receiving systemic therapy after pericardial effusion, and the time period from stage IV lung cancer to the presence of pericardial effusion were independent prognostic factors for pericardial effusion RFS and OS.

Conclusions

Patients who have undergone simple pericardiocentesis alone for the management of NSCLC-related pericardial effusion have lower 1-year RFS rates than those who have undergone balloon pericardiotomy and surgical pericardiectomy. Therefore, balloon pericardiotomy and surgical pericardiectomy should be carried out for patients with NSCLC-related pericardial effusion if tolerable.

•

This is the first study to compare the three common procedures to manage NSCLC-related pericardial effusion.

•

Simple pericardiocentesis group had lower 1-year RFS rate than balloon pericardiotomy or surgical pericardiectomy group.

•

Surgical pericardiectomy as management demonstrated an improving OS trend.

Evaluation and management of cancer patients presenting with acute cardiovascular disease: a Consensus Document of the Acute CardioVascular Care (ACVC) association and the ESC council of Cardio-Oncology-Part 1: acute coronary syndromes and acute pericardial diseases

Advances in treatment, common cardiovascular (CV) risk factors and the ageing of the population have led to an increasing number of cancer patients presenting with acute CV diseases. These events may be related to the cancer itself or the cancer treatment. Acute cardiac care specialists must be aware of these acute CV complications and be able to manage them. This may require an individualized and multidisciplinary approach. We summarize the most common acute CV complications of cytotoxic, targeted, and immune-based therapies. This is followed by a proposal for a multidisciplinary approach where acute cardiologists work close together with the treating oncologists, haematologists, and radiation specialists, especially in situations where immediate therapeutic decisions are needed. In this first part, we further focus on the management of acute coronary syndromes and acute pericardial diseases in patients with cancer.

Percutaneous pericardiocentesis for pericardial effusion: predictors of mortality and outcomes

Pericardial effusion can dangerously precipitate patient's hemodynamic stability and requires prompt intervention in case of tamponade. We investigated potential predictors of in-hospital mortality, a composite outcome of in-hospital mortality, pericardiocentesis-related complications, and the need for emergency cardiac surgery and all-cause mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous pericardiocentesis. This is an observational, retrospective, single-center study on patients undergoing percutaneous pericardiocentesis (2010-2019). We enrolled 81 consecutive patients. Median age was 71.4 years (interquartile range [IQR] 58.1-78.1 years) and 51 (63%) were male. Most of the pericardiocentesis were performed in an urgency setting (76.5%) for cardiac tamponade (77.8%). The most common etiology was idiopathic (33.3%) followed by neoplastic (22.2%). In-hospital mortality was 14.8% while mortality during follow-up (mean 17.1 months) was 44.4%. Only hemodynamic instability (i.e., cardiogenic shock, hypotension refractory to fluid challenge therapy and inotropes) was associated with in-hospital mortality at the univariate analysis (odds ratio [OR] 7.2; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.76-29.4). Non-neoplastic/non-idiopathic etiology and hemodynamic instability were associated with the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality, need for emergency cardiac surgery, or pericardiocentesis-related complications (OR 5.75, 95% CI 1.65-20.01, and OR 5.81, 95% CI 2.11-15.97, respectively). Multivariate Cox regression analysis adjusted for possible confounding variables (age, coronary artery disease, and hemodynamic instability) showed that neoplastic etiology was independently associated with medium-term mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 4.05, 95% CI 1.45-11.36). In a real-world population treated with pericardiocentesis for pericardial effusion, in-hospital adverse outcomes and medium-term mortality are consistent, in particular for patients presenting with hemodynamic instability or neoplastic pericardial effusion.

Lung Adenocarcinoma Presenting as Malignant Pericardial Effusion/Tamponade

Lung cancers are the most common primary tumors that involve the pericardium with a prevalence of up to 50%. Usually, pericardial involvement goes undetected with almost 10%-12% found among all cancer related autopsies. Rarely pericardial effusions can be the initial site of metastasis and initial manifestation of a primary tumor. In our case, we report a 57-year-old female presenting with cardiac tamponade and subsequent testing was done which revealed lung adenocarcinoma. Malignant pericardial effusions are often silent, but certain times can present with symptoms of shortness of breath, chest pain, cough, arrhythmias, and rarely as pericardial tamponade. A high index of suspicion is required when a patient presents with tamponade to diagnose malignancy. Emergent pericardiocentesis may be warranted depending on the clinical presentation but quite often, patients tend to have a poor prognosis despite therapy given the extent of disease.

Case study-based systematic review of literature on lymphoma-associated cardiac tamponade

This study aimed to compile all the relevant studies of patients presenting with pericardial tamponade before or after diagnosis of lymphoma, describe the clinical presentations of patients with lymphoma and cardiac tamponade, and assess the difference in overall survival based on the timing of cardiac tamponade diagnosis.

A comprehensive search strategy was conducted in the following databases: PubMed and Cochrane Library, using the following keywords: Lymphoma AND Cardiac Tamponade. The criteria for eligibility included cases with a confirmed diagnosis of lymphoma and cardiac tamponade, human studies, and publications in English language. The statistical analysis was performed using IBM Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20. We included 48 research articles (n = 52 cases) with adequate reporting of measured outcomes. The median age of the patients was 52 (9–94) years. Only 6 patients were noted to have primary cardiac lymphoma, while the majority of cases were considered to have secondary cardiac lymphoma (88.5%). According to the data on the type of lymphoma reported through cytology and immunohistochemistry, 49 patients were diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and of these cases the most common subtype was large B-cell lymphoma (42.9%). Overall, the average duration of illness was 14 ± 23 days. A total of 13 patients had distant heart sounds, 12 cases were noted to be hypotensive, and 13 subjects were found to have increased jugular venous pressure.

Our retrospective study demonstrated that most patients presented with pericardial tamponade after lymphoma diagnosis, and those were mostly secondary cardiac lymphoma of the non-Hodgkin type with large B-cell as the most common subtype. Dyspnoea, oedema, and constitutional symptoms were the most common presenting signs. The median overall survival of patients with lymphoma and cardiac tamponade is 4 months, with no significant difference in mortality in the presentation timing before and after the diagnosis of lymphoma.

Effectiveness and outcomes of 2 therapeutic interventions for cardiac tamponade: A retrospective observational study

Pericardial effusions can either be drained by percutaneous pericardiocentesis (PCC) or by surgical pericardiotomy (SP), with limited evidence of superiority for the management of cardiac tamponade (CTa).This study uses the US Nationwide Emergency Department Sample database to investigate the effectiveness of SP and PCC in patients with CTa in terms of clinical outcomes and healthcare costs.Retrospective observational study conducted on the US Nationwide Emergency Department Sample 2014 dataset CTa patients. Descriptive and multivariate logistic regression analyses were done to assess the impact of different procedures (none, SP, PCC, SP, and PCC) on mortality.A total of 10,410 CTa patients were included, of which 28.9% underwent no procedure, 32.9% underwent SP, 30.2% underwent PCC and 8.0% underwent SP and PCC. Mortality rates were highest in patients undergoing no procedure (22.3%) followed by PCC (15.0%), SP and PCC (11.5%), and then SP (9.6%) (P < .001). SP patients had longer length of stay (11.65 vs 8.16 days, P < .001) and higher total charges ($162,889.1 vs $100,802, P < .001) compared to PCC patients. Undergoing any procedure for CTa reduced the rate of mortality compared to no procedure with SP being the most effective (OR = 0.323, 95%CI 0.244-0.429), followed by SP & PCC (OR = 0.387, 95% CI 0.239-0.626), and then PCC (OR = 0.582, 95% CI 0.446-0.760).Adult CTa patients treated with SP had lower mortality rates but longer length of stay and higher healthcare expenses. This SP associated benefit remained consistent across different subpopulations after stratifying by age and potential disease etiology.

Echo-Guided Pericardiocentesis: When and How Should It Be Performed?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Abnormal accumulation of pericardial fluid is a common cardiac condition with different etiologies. Draining of the pericardial fluid (pericardiocentesis) is often indicated for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes and is performed in an elective or emergent setting. Echocardiography is the primary imaging method for diagnosing, localizing, and quantifying pericardial effusion as well as evaluating its hemodynamic effects, including the presence of cardiac tamponade. In this manuscript, we review the indications for pericardiocentesis and provide practical step-by-step guidance for echo-guided pericardiocentesis.

RECENT FINDINGS

Echo-guidance is an effective method to improve the safety and efficacy of pericardiocentesis. In experienced hands and with a stepwise approach, procedural outcomes are excellent, and complication rates are very low. Asymptomatic small idiopathic effusions have a benign course and can be left untreated. Prolonged drainage with an indwelling pericardial catheter is key for preventing fluid re-accumulation, and the use of colchicine to prevent fluid recurrence is encouraged whenever possible. Understanding how to evaluate the significance of a pericardial effusion as well as the procedural steps in the performance of a pericardiocentesis are essential for optimal outcomes in treating patients with pericardial effusions and tamponade.

Cardiac Interventional Procedures in Cardio-Oncology Patients

Comorbidities specific to the cardio-oncology population contribute to the challenges in the interventional management of patients with cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Patients with cancer have generally been excluded from cardiovascular randomized clinical trials. Endovascular procedures may represent a valid option in patients with cancer with a range of CVDs because of their minimally invasive nature. Patients with cancer are less likely to be treated according to societal guidelines because of perceived high risk. This article presents the specific challenges that interventional cardiologists face when caring for patients with cancer and the modern tools to optimize care.

Pericardial diseases in patients with cancer: contemporary prevalence, management and outcomes

Neoplastic pericardial effusion is a common and serious manifestation of advanced malignancies. Lung and breast carcinoma, haematological malignancies, and gastrointestinal cancer are the most common types of cancer involving the pericardium. Pericardial involvement in neoplasia may arise from several different pathophysiological mechanisms and may be manifested by pericardial effusion with or without tamponade, effusive-constrictive pericarditis and constrictive pericarditis. Management of these patients is a complex multidisciplinary problem, affected by clinical status and prognosis of patients.

Surgical treatment of cardiac tamponade developed in two patients with terminal stage lung cancer

Introduction: Although tamponade due to pericardial effusion that develops in advanced stage lung cancer is rare, it is a life-threatening complication. Case report: 59 and 72 years old 2 female patients diagnosed with cardiac tamponade were hospitalized in Cardiology Clinic of Balækesir State Hospital. Massive pericardial effusion that caused diastolic collapse of right ventricle was detected in their echocardiographies. Inoperable lung cancer was diagnosed as a result of bronchoscopy performed due to pathologies observed in their radiograms. Despite repeated pericardiocentesis, fluid continued to accumulate rapidly. Hence, pericardioperitoneal window was formed through subxiphoid route to obtain continuous drainage in both patients. Significant pericardial effusion didn't develop in echocardiographies in the 2nd and the 6th-month post-operative follow-ups. Conclusion: Subxiphoid pericardioperitoneal window is a simple, safe and effective surgical procedure. It may be performed in some patients with malignant tamponade

Surgical pericardial drainage procedures have a limited diagnostic sensitivity

Purpose

Cardiothoracic surgeons are frequently called upon to perform surgical pericardial drainage procedures (pericardial window) for pericardial effusions. These procedures have therapeutic value, but the diagnostic value of such procedures is debated. We set out to determine the sensitivity of pericardial drainage to detect the disease when cytology, microbiology, and pathology are evaluated.

Methods

A retrospective chart review of patients who underwent pericardial windows from 1 July 2011 to 1 January 2018 at a single academic institution was conducted. All patients who had undergone a recent trauma or cardiac procedure were excluded. Cytology, microbiology, and pathology were examined. The charts were then carefully reviewed to determine if a clinical diagnosis was reached. Sensitivity was then calculated for all diseases and for those that should have been able to be detected.

Results

One hundred sixty‐two patients who had undergone a pericardial drainage procedure were identified; 49 patients were excluded for recent cardiac procedure or trauma. Of the 113 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 56 patients (49.6%) were female with a mean age of 59.7 ± 15.1 years. A diagnosis based on the pathology, microbiology, or cytology was obtained for 27 patients. The most common pathologies detected were adenocarcinoma (11), bacteremia (9), and small cell lung cancer (3); 56 patients had underlying pathologies that would have been possible to detect with either pathology, microbiology, or cytology. The most common detectable diagnoses were adenocarcinoma (20), bacteremia (12), and lymphoma (7). The most common undetectable diagnoses were idiopathic (17), cardiorenal fluid overload (17), and viral (11). The sensitivity of a pericardial drainage procedure for detecting disease was 0.24 for all cases, and 0.48 when restricted to cases where a detectable disease was present.

Conclusion

Cytology, microbiology, and pathology for pericardial drainage procedures were unable to detect a diagnosis for 76% of all cases and greater than 50% of cases with the theoretically detectable disease. Pericardial drainage procedures have a clear therapeutic value, but they have limited diagnostic utility.

Intrapericardial carboplatin in the management of malignant pericardial effusion in breast cancer: a pilot study

PURPOSE

Malignant pericarditis is observed in 5.1-7.0% of all cases of acute pericarditis, and malignant pericardial effusion (MPE) can lead to cardiac tamponade in the later stages of cancer. Breast cancer is the second most common primary cancer associated with MPE, but the efficacy and safety of intrapericardial carboplatin (CBDCA) have never been evaluated in breast cancer. In this study, we assessed the clinical significance of intrapericardial CBDCA following catheter drainage in patients with breast cancer-related MPE.

METHODS

A catheter was inserted percutaneously into the pericardial space under echocardiographic guidance. After complete drainage, 150 mg of CBDCA was instilled into the pericardial space through the catheter.

RESULTS

Eight patients with symptomatic breast cancer-related MPE were treated at the Gunma Prefectural Cancer Center, between July 2010 and March 2016. One month after treatment, 100% of MPE was controlled. The median survival time from the recurrence of breast cancer until death or study follow-up was 2336 days (range 293-3937 days), while that from intrapericardial CBDCA administration until death or study follow-up was 552 days (range 35-1673 days). Grade 1 fever, nausea, hypotension, fatigue, and chest discomfort were observed in one patient (12.5%) after intrapericardial CBDCA administration.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that intrapericardial administration of CBDCA after catheter drainage appears to be safe and effective in managing breast cancer-associated MPE. As the number of patients in this study was small, further studies are warranted to determine the safety and efficacy of intrapericardial CBDCA in the management of breast cancer-related MPE.

Safety and Outcome of Percutaneous Drainage of Pericardial Effusions in Patients with Cancer

Malignancy is a common cause of pericardial effusions. The findings, immediate safety and longer-term outcomes of pericardiocentesis are less well defined. We reviewed the cases of all patients with malignancy that underwent pericardiocentesis at our institution over a 10-year period. From January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2016, 171 patients with cancer underwent echo-guided pericardiocentesis. A total of 53% were male with a mean age of 60 ± 15 years. The average volume drained was 485 (IQR 350 to 719) ml. The procedure was technically successful in 170/171 (99.4%) of patients without significant complications; there were no procedure-related deaths. A total of 20% had hemorrhagic, 48% had serosanguinous, and 31% serous pericardial effusions. The type of effusion was not associated with outcome. Cytology (measured in 164) was positive in 58% and only weakly related to outcome (median survival nine versus 18 weeks, p = 0.04). Per our institutional practice, a pericardial catheter was left in place until there were less than 50 ml of net drainage in 24 hours (average 3 ± 2 days). A total of 135 patients had metastatic carcinoma, 23 patients had lymphoma or chronic leukemia and 4 metastatic sarcoma. Patients with either lymphoma or chronic leukemia had better survival than those with carcinoma or sarcoma (median survival 102 vs 12 weeks, p < 0.0001) with a 46% vs 3% 5-year survival, p < 0.0001). Echoguided pericardiocentesis with extended pericardial catheter placement is safe and effective in cancer patients with pericardial effusions. However, overall outcomes are poor in cancer patients with pericardial effusions that required drainage, particularly in those with carcinoma or sarcoma.

Surgery for Tumors of the Heart

Most surgeons will encounter only a handful of primary cardiac tumors outside of myxomas. Approximately 3 quarters of primary cardiac tumors are benign and 1 quarter is malignant. In most cases, cardiac tumors are silent but when symptoms do occur, they are primarily determined by tumor size and anatomical location, not by histopathology. The diagnosis and preoperative imaging relies heavily on multimodal imaging including echocardiography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and coronary angiography. Surgical resection is the most common treatment for most simple primary cardiac tumors and for some complex benign tumors. Surgical resection of primary cardiac tumors frequently involves the need for complex cardiac reconstruction, particularly when malignant. Secondary tumors to the heart are 30 times more frequent than primary cardiac tumors, and their incidence is increasing, largely as a result of advances in cancer diagnosis and therapy. Surgical resection is feasible in only a small fraction of highly-selected patients with secondary tumors to the heart. For complex benign tumors-such as paraganglioma or large fibromas-and all primary and secondary malignant tumors, a multidisciplinary cardiac tumor team review in experienced centers of excellence is recommended.

Pericardial Disease in Cancer Patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To understand the variety of conditions in which the pericardium may be affected in cancer patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Cancer may affect the pericardium directly (primary cancer; uncommon) or through metastases (commoner). Cancer treatment (chemotherapy and radiotherapy) may affect the pericardium leading to pericarditis and myopericarditis. Pericardial effusions, tamponade and constrictive pericarditis are complications that can also occur. A variety of techniques (predominantly cardiac imaging related) are used to make the diagnosis with the treatment strategy dependent on whether the pericardial disease is due to cancer or as a result of cancer treatment. A variety of pericardial diseases may be caused by cancer and cancer treatment. Determining the aetiology and providing effective treatment can often be challenging.

A rare cause of constrictive pericarditis

A 67-year-old man presented with 3 months of exertional dyspnoea and 1 week of oedema. Examination revealed elevated neck veins, pulsus paradoxus, muffled heart sounds, decreased breath sounds and pedal oedema. Transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) demonstrated cardiac tamponade, and chest X-ray showed pleural effusion. Pericardiocentesis, thoracocentesis, laboratory investigations and CT did not elucidate an underlying aetiology. Three weeks later, he presented with recurrent cardiac tamponade and pleural effusion. Pericardial window histology was benign. Pleural and pericardial fluids were again unrevealing. Three months later, he presented with worsening congestive heart failure. TTE, cardiac catheterisation and cardiac MRI were consistent with constrictive pericarditis. Preoperative workup did not identify an underlying cause. The patient underwent subtotal pericardiectomy. Intraoperative frozen section indicated malignancy. Pathology confirmed metastatic poorly differentiated signet ring adenocarcinoma of intestinal origin. He died 4 days postoperatively from multiorgan failure.

Survival after surgical drainage of malignant pericardial effusion

OBJECTIVES

Management of malignant pericardial effusion (PE) is complex. Cardiac surgeons are not necessarily familiar with or are challenged by the many underlying etiologies. Analyzing risk factors for mortality may help to estimate the benefit of surgery in high-risk patients.

METHODS

Patients undergoing a surgical pericardiotomy for malignant PE, between 2001 and 2011, were included. The influence of tumor type, disease extension, intra-pericardial tumor infiltration on early mortality and long-term survival as well as freedom from symptoms after drainage, and the use of sclerosing agents on PE recurrence rates was analyzed.

RESULTS

PE drainage was performed on 46 patients 12 ± 30 months after tumor diagnosis. Malignant diseases were lung cancers (50 %), breast cancers (15 %), lymphoma and leukemia (13 %), cancers of the digestive tract (13 %), and others (9 %). 80 % of patients were symptomatic and symptom relief was achieved in 65 %. Nobody died during surgery. Recurrence rate was 4 %. Early in-hospital mortality was 22 %. After 1 year, 29 % of patients were alive. Eleven patients (24 %) had a complete tumor regression. Metastatic spread (p < 0.001), pericardial infiltration (p = 0.02), and intra-pericardial Bleomycin (p = 0.01) injection were associated with increased mortality. Hematological malignancies had a better prognosis for survival.

CONCLUSION

Surgical pericardiotomy is safe, associated with a low recurrence rate and symptom relief in the majority of dyspneic patients. Intra-pericardial Bleomycin may reduce recurrent effusion but does not ameliorate survival. Long-term survival rate was low with an increased mortality in cases of metastatic spreading, pericardial infiltration, and as the tumor of origin: breast cancers. Leukemic and lymphatic tumors have better prognosis.

Pericardiocentesis versus pericardiotomy for malignant pericardial effusion: a retrospective comparison

BACKGROUND

Treatment of malignant pericardial effusion remains controversial, because no randomized controlled trials have been conducted to determine the best approach, and results of retrospective studies have been inconsistent. The objective of the present study was to compare pericardiocentesis and pericardiotomy with respect to efficacy for preventing recurrence, and to determine, for those two procedures, diagnostic yields, complication rates, and effects on survival. We also aimed to identify clinical and procedural factors that could predict effusion recurrence.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed 61 patients who underwent a procedure for treatment of a malignant pericardial effusion at the Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec between February 2004 and September 2013.

RESULTS

Pericardiocentesis was performed in 42 patients, and pericardiotomy, in 19 patients. The effusion recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients treated with pericardiocentesis than with pericardiotomy (31.0% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.046). The diagnostic yield of the procedures was not significantly different (92.9% vs. 86.7%, p = 0.6). The overall rate of complications was similar in the two groups, as was the median overall survival (2.4 months vs. 2.6 months, p = 0.5). In univariate analyses, the procedure type was the only predictor of recurrence that approached statistical significance. Age, sex, type of cancer, presence of effusion at the time of cancer diagnosis, prior chest irradiation, tamponade upon presentation, and total volume of fluid removed did not influence the recurrence rate.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with pericardiocentesis, pericardiotomy had higher success rate in preventing recurrence of malignant pericardial effusion, with similar diagnostic yields, complication rates, and overall survival.

Differential Impact of Constrictive Physiology after Pericardiocentesis in Malignancy Patients with Pericardial Effusion

BACKGROUND

Echocardiographic signs of constrictive physiology (CP) after pericardiocentesis are frequently observed in malignancy patients. The purpose of the current study was to explore whether features of CP after pericardiocentesis have prognostic impact in malignancy patients with pericardial effusion (PE).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 467 consecutive patients who underwent pericardiocentesis at our institution from January 2006 to May 2014. Among them, 205 patients with advanced malignancy who underwent comprehensive echocardiography after the procedure comprised the study population. Co-primary end points were all-cause mortality (ACM) and repeated drainage (RD) for PE. Patients were divided into four subgroups according to cytologic result for malignant cells and CP (positive cytology with negative CP, both positive, both negative, and negative cytology with positive CP).

RESULTS

CP after pericardiocentesis was present in 106 patients (50%) at median 4 days after the procedure. During median follow-up of 208 days, ACM and RD occurred in 162 patients (79%) and 29 patients (14%), respectively. Cox regression analysis revealed that independent predictors for ACM were male gender and positive cytology (all, p < 0.05). For RD, predictors were positive cytology, the absence of cardiac tamponade, and negative CP after pericardiocentesis (all, p < 0.05). When the patients were divided into four subgroups, patients with negative cytology and positive CP demonstrated the most favorable survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.39, p = 0.005) and the lowest RD rates (HR: 0.07, p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

CP after pericardiocentesis is common, but does not always imply poor survival or the need for RD in patients with advanced malignancies. On the contrary, the presence of CP in patients with negative cytology conferred the most favorable survival and the lowest rate of RD. Comprehensive echocardiographic evaluation for CP after pericardiocentesis would be helpful for predicting prognosis in patients with advanced malignancies.

Outcomes of Cancer Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Pericardiocentesis for Pericardial Effusion

BACKGROUND

Pericardial effusion (PE) is common in cancer patients, but the optimal therapeutic approach is not well defined. Percutaneous pericardiocentesis is less invasive than surgery, but its long-term effectiveness and safety have not been well documented.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to evaluate outcomes of cancer patients undergoing percutaneous pericardiocentesis for PE and assess the procedure's safety in patients with thrombocytopenia.

METHODS

Cancer patients who underwent percutaneous pericardiocentesis for PE between November 2009 and October 2014 at the MD Anderson Cancer Center were included. Procedure-related complications, effusion recurrence rate, and overall survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 1,645 cancer patients referred for PE, 212 (13%) underwent percutaneous pericardiocentesis. The procedure was successful in 99% of the cases, and there were no procedure-related deaths. Four patients had major procedure-related bleeding that did not vary by platelet count <50,000/μl or ≥50,000/μl (p = 0.1281). Patients with catheter drainage for 3 to 5 days had the lowest recurrence rate (10%). Median overall survival was 143 days; older age (i.e., >65 years), lung cancer, platelet count <20,000/μl, and malignant pericardial fluid were independently associated with poor prognosis. Lung cancer patients with proven malignant effusions had a significantly shorter median 1-year survival compared with those with nonmalignant effusions (16.2% vs. 49.0%, respectively; log-rank test p = 0.0101). A similar difference in 1-year survival was not observed in patients with breast cancer (40.2% vs. 40.0%; log-rank test p = 0.4170).

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous pericardiocentesis with extended catheter drainage was safe and effective as the primary treatment for PE in cancer patients, including in those with thrombocytopenia. Malignant PE significantly shortened the survival outcome of patients with lung cancer but not those with breast cancer.

Systematic review of percutaneous interventions for malignant pericardial effusion

The present systematic review assessed the safety and efficacy of percutaneous interventions for malignant pericardial effusion (MPE), with primary endpoint of recurrence of pericardial effusion. Electronic searches of six databases identified thirty-one studies, reporting outcomes following isolated pericardiocentesis (n=305), pericardiocentesis followed by extended catheter drainage (n=486), pericardial instillation of sclerosing agents (n=392) or percutaneous balloon pericardiotomy (PBP) (n=157). Isolated pericardiocentesis demonstrated a pooled recurrence rate of 38.3%. Pooled recurrence rates for extended catheter drainage, pericardial sclerosis and PBP were 12.1%, 10.8% and 10.3%, respectively. Procedure-related mortality ranged from 0.5-1.0% across the percutaneous interventions. Although isolated pericardiocentesis can safely deliver immediate symptomatic relief, subsequent catheter drainage or sclerotherapy are required to minimize recurrence. PBP has been shown to be highly effective and may be particularly useful in managing recurrent effusions. Ultimately, the choice of intervention must be based on the clinical status of patients, their underlying malignancy and the expertise available.